If it is helpful, I would like to contribute Just like world university rankings, there are lots of different versions and ranking methods. However, the ranking from well-known websites or media would make it easy for general users to accept.
This comment is just from the website of RedMonk, and the full comments are as follows.
Julia (3) : A week or so ago, we received the following inquiry from a large vendor: “what are your thoughts on Julia – is it going to remain a niche language or grow or die?” The inquiry was interesting, both because of where it came from and because we haven’t had anybody ask about Julia in some time. While it’s been written up here before, it has tended to move very slowly and thus hasn’t attracted much attention. But the inquiry was well timed, because according to our rankings Julia is making slow but steady progress. This quarter Julia jumped three spots to 36, which is its fourth consecutive quarter of growth (36, 39, 40, 52). It’s certainly not on a Kotlin or Swift path, and the esoteric nature of the language may yet relegate it to niche status, but its steady performance has put it back on the map as one to watch. (RedMonk, August 10, 2018)
There is also this rank: http://pypl.github.io/PYPL.html (PopularitY of Programming Language). Julia is number 21 there and is going up.
That’s an interesting ranking. The results feel a lot less noisy—which makes sense since google searches are a really statistically reliable data source. But the results seem heavily biased towards languages that people are learning rather than those that people already know and are using on a daily basis. Note the complete absence of C and C++ from the list!
It is #6.
That said, if one is learning C/C++ from a tutorial, something is horribly wrong. At least a book would be necessary; each is fairly complex and does not decompose well into a minimum viable subset, especially C++. Same goes for Haskell.
Could also be an indicator of quality of syntax and/or documentation quality - for me personally, using R I reckon I average out at 2-3 google queries per finished line of code, whereas with Julia that number is much closer to zero (numbers might be exaggerated for effect).
Along those lines it’d be interesting to see the extent to which the recent uptick in interest was driven by the query julia variable not defined error…
Oh man, I somehow totally missed that! Maybe because I was expecting them as separate entries, not a single entry. Still, sixth is unusually low as a ranking for C or C++ let alone the two together, so I think it does show that there is a bias as compared to other (also biases but in different ways) rankings.
Redmonk January 2019 - ( posted by: March 20, 2019 )
" Julia : For a language that isn’t even in the Top 30, Julia continues to attract questions about its performance and future. Its growth has been more tortoise than hare, but it’s up another two spots to place #34. While there is no technical basis for comparison, it is worth noting that three years ago in our Q1 rankings TypeScript made a similar modest jump from #33 to #31. That is not to say that Julia is destined to follow in TypeScript’s footprints, of course, but rather to serve as a reminder that while it’s uncommon languages can transition quickly from periods of slow, barely measurable growth to high, sustained growth quarter after quarter."